It was reported by Aamer Madhani, a White House reporter under Barack Hussein Obama’s criminal administration, that big city mayors have vowed to defy the law and President Donald Trump regarding sanctuary cities harboring illegal aliens.

Aamer reported, “As you may know, back in Jan 26, 2017 several big city mayors across the U.S. vowed to defy President Trump’s executive order that threatens to cut off federal funding to cities that offer some sort of protection to illegal immigrants in their communities.”

The question is, how did they approve the funding in the first place?

Furthermore, the Law does not protect illegal aliens. It prosecutes them.

Aamer continued, “The pushback came from these mayors came as Trump signed a long-anticipated executive order that directs the government to identify federal money it can withhold to punish so-called ‘sanctuary cities.’”

Since when did the federal government receive delegated authority from the American people to take their tax money and reallocate it to cities that are harboring illegal aliens?

Aamer added, “If you remember, Trump had pledged to take action against sanctuary cities on the campaign trail.”

“But as Trump announced the order — as well as action to build a wall along the U.S-Mexico border and hire thousands of new border patrol agents and immigration officers — leaders of some of the nation's biggest cities flatly stated they would not cooperate with the president,” Aamer wrote.

And you need to ask why. This is not Trump against the mayors. This is the mayors working against American Law! And the law exposes the criminal (Romans 3:20).

Aamer reported “In New York, Mayor Bill de Blasio vowed that the action ‘won’t change how we enforce the law in New York City.’”

“De Blasio said that the city has been able to dramatically reduce the crime rate in the nation’s largest city, in part, because relationships the police department has managed to build in immigrant communities,” the report continued. “He added that if Trump follows through with the plan it would mean he's effectively cutting funding from the New York Police Department.”

In other words, through totalitarian methods, Mayor de Blasio is attempting to use the law against the law. Here, you have the criminal blaming the law for his crimes (1 John 3:12).

“Here in New York City and in cities across the nation, this executive order could in fact undermine public safety and make our neighborhoods less safe,” de Blasio said.

What De Blasio said was that the enforcement of law could undermine public safety. He is the one personally responsible for the undermining of the public’s safety. Was America told that they were under an Islamic threat after September 11, 2001? How does his statement line up with the facts?

· There were 68.57 illegal aliens imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in Arizona, compared to 54.06 citizens and legal noncitizens imprisoned for every 100,000 citizens and legal noncitizens.

· There were 97.2 illegals imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in California, compared to 74.1 citizens and legal noncitizens imprisoned per 100,000 citizen and legal noncitizens.

· There were 54.85 illegals imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in Florida, compared to 67.8 legal immigrants imprisoned for every 100,000 legal immigrants.

· There were 168.75 illegals imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in New York, compared to 48.12 legal immigrants imprisoned for every 100,000 legal immigrants.

· There were 54.54 illegals imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in Texas, compared to 65.43 legal immigrants.

“After President Donald Trump signed an executive order exploring cutting off funding to so-called sanctuary cities, mayors on both coasts of the U.S. say their cities will not be bullied,” Aamer reported.

These mayors are the ones that are bullying anyone who does not go along with their lawless objectives. These are Saul Alinsky tactics at their best. They play the victim while perpetuating the crime.

In Boston, Mayor Marty Walsh called the executive order an attack on "Boston’s people, Boston’s strength and Boston’s values.”

“If people want to live here, they’ll live here,” Walsh told reporters at a news conference. “They can use my office. They can use any office in this building.”

Americans should put these criminal actors that masquerade as mayors in jail where they belong, and remind each and every one of them that these buildings belong to “We the people.”

Furthermore no one has the right to desecrate the blood of those who fought, bled and died enforcing the very laws that they are violating.

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray, who has been accused and investigated for sexually molesting minors, said, “We believe we have the rule of law and the courts on our side.”

The opposite is true as I am about to show you.

Mayor of Chicago Rham Emanuel said, “I want to be clear. We're gonna stay a sanctuary city. There is no stranger among us. We welcome people, whether you're from Poland or Pakistan, whether you're from Ireland or India or Israel and whether you're from Mexico or Moldova, where my grandfather came from, you are welcome in Chicago as you pursue the American Dream."

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee told reporters nothing has changed for his city following Trump’s executive order.

“I am here today to say we are still a sanctuary city,” Lee said. “We stand by our sanctuary city because we want everybody to feel safe and utilize the services they deserve, including education and health care.”

Have Americans been inundated by the media’s narrative that there are threats constantly against “We the people”? Who has attacked the rights of Americans more than those who call themselves representatives? No one has.

Here, we have mayors that are committing treason (Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution) by opening the doors to those who are sworn enemies to America (Jeremiah 11:9).

A top aide to Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan questioned whether the city even qualified as a sanctuary city.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors and the Major Cities Chiefs Association expressed concern that the executive order is overly vague.

“We call upon the Secretary of Homeland Security to document and promulgate a lawful definition before further actions are taken, so the cities across the Nation may determine how to proceed," the organization added.

knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;

(ii)

knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;

(iii)

knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv)

encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or

(v)

(I)

engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II)

aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,

shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).

(B)A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs—

(i)

in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;

(ii)

in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;

(iii)

in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(iv)

in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under title 18, or both.